The thing that really fucked me off yesterday...

[past caring]

You never know how you'll react under those circumstances so I wouldn't be too quick to judge.

That's right - we shouldn't judge anybody.

 

[Badger Kitten]

When I got out at Russell Square there was a man filming with a videophone. I shouted at him. He was filming us staggering out. He was in the fucking way as we were trying to get out. I felt like punching him.

 

[past caring]

Fin.

(ps - don't know you, but glad you're ok)

 

[Agent Sparrow]

That's right - we shouldn't judge anybody.

What world do you live in if you just automatically assume these people were coldly filming due to a psychopathic voyarism and desire to get in on the action?

Unfortunately, its quite possible that some filmers were motivated by some factors, but I suspect the majority were people who are not naturally good in a crisis, who found themselves milling around feeling useless, and feeling bad about being useless, and thought that at least by filming they were doing something that might be of use.

These poor people on scene are most likely more traumatised by anyone off scene, so who are we to turn around and slate their motives?

<edited to add> Badger Kitten, as I've said before what you've been through must be terrible, and at least I can understand your feelings towards the filmers, if not quite past carings, (and the person you've spoken about does seem a cunt to ignore pleas of help), but in other situations where people were being dealt with and there were spare people milling around, surely people must know that not everyone is capable of dealing with crisis in the same way. I'd hope to god that if I was on site I would have been one of the first aiders (but as the biggest crisis I've ever had was stopping someone choking to death what the fuck do I know), but some people will cause more harm than good.

<final edit> I just think it seems a bit rich of someone who wasn't there (past caring) to question motives of those who were there. People are odd, irrational creatures who can act in ways we wouldn't expect. I just feel that labelling all filmers cunts is actually being unhelpfully critical of some people who themselves have gone through a horrific event.

 

[Yetman]

For what it is worth i think it was pretty ghoulish

btw, was the Manic Street Preachers song, 'Kevin Carter' about this same man?

Yep. one and the same. Kevin won some highly acclaimed prize, (Nobel?) I think he didnt do anything after taking the shot (agree with you BrainAddict) but I suppose the story is out there if anyones that interested.

 

[past caring]

<final edit> I just think it seems a bit rich of someone who wasn't there (past caring) to question motives of those who were there. People are odd, irrational creatures who can act in ways we wouldn't expect. I just feel that labelling all filmers cunts is actually being unhelpfully critical of some people who themselves have gone through a horrific event.

You weren't there either, but are quite happy to mouth off.

Attention to detail isn't your strong suit, is it?. At no point did I label "all filmers
cunts". Just one.

 

[Badgers]

I have mixed feelings on this issue but most of my points have been covered.

However I was disappointed by one piece of footage that the BBC (and possibly others) showed of a guy on a stretcher having resuscitation. I really hope his family did not have to view him possibly dying on national television.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

You weren't there either, but are quite happy to mouth off.

Attention to detail isn't your strong suit, is it?. At no point did I label "all filmers
cunts". Just one.

It did feel as though you were talking about all amatuer filmers...

As someone else has posted on another thread, tempers and nerves are frayed at the moment, and tbh, at this point in time there's no positive purpose whatsoever in having any sort of argument about this. And possibly the filmer you are talking about was being a selfish bastard rather than somebody feeling wobbly, uncertain about what to do and clinging to whatever purpose they could think of - I guess neither of us will know. Its just always got to me when in times of crisis, people who find it difficult to act in the "ideal" way but who try to do something they think might help are written off as cunts.

 

[past caring]

Look, maybe let's just leave it...

I know what you're saying about not everyone under pressure acting in an ideal way - I think I said in the OP that I could understand people running away in terror. And whilst I might hope that I'd react differently, that's all I can say about my own actions....

All I can go on is how that particular piece of film looked......

 

[tobyjug]

But the cunt stood there, calmly watching someone in distress, their life maybe slipping away, whose reaction is to get their mobile out and capture the thing on film? I fucking despair.....

People react in vary varied ways to emergency situations, a few get stuck in and help, and get others to help. Others are so shocked they wander off in a daze, (these may be severely mentally traumatised and if possible they need keeping an eye on).
One can either handle a disaster situation or you can't, if people react in odd ways they should not really be critised unless they get involved in some criminal activity like picking dead and injured peoples pockets. (in the latter case if one has time adding them to the casualty list by using a suitable blunt instrument on them is acceptable)

 

[Cid]

Nice shot for the album, undoubtedly.....

The point is that the specific footage I'm referring to was clearly taken before any doctors were on the scene. The injured person was clearly in a very bad way, was getting comforted/held by a member of the public - but was clearly not receiving medical help....

How can you tell it was a member of the public? The doctors would probably be in normal clothes. I think there's a lot of value in documenting the immediate aftermath of these events - it means police can use the footage in whatever investigations they do, and there is value in having these things reported.

 

[Cid]

jesus, that's nasty - never seen it before. but surely he could have taken the photo and then helped the kid? it needn't have been either/or.

It's hard to understand isn't it? but put yourself in the same situation - what can you actually do? You can't help all the children you come across, and in reality you'd probably be doing little more than prolonging their deaths. I have no idea what I'd do in that situation - i mean I doubt I'd stand there taking photos. He's a journalist though and that's what he was there for, that picture will have touched thousands of people. Horrible decisions to make, not surprised he ended up commiting suicide...

 

[kasheem]

'Cos we're living in the Spectator Society.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

It's hard to understand isn't it? but put yourself in the same situation - what can you actually do? You can't help all the children you come across, and in reality you'd probably be doing little more than prolonging their deaths. I have no idea what I'd do in that situation - i mean I doubt I'd stand there taking photos. He's a journalist though and that's what he was there for, that picture will have touched thousands of people. Horrible decisions to make, not surprised he ended up commiting suicide...

In a way its a much, much more extreme and horrific version of not giving money to begging kids in Africa (or some other place where poverty is rife) when travelling there. You can't actually give to everyone, so do you just give to some? Where do you draw the line?

I can completely see though why that would have cracked him up. I don't think I could have lasted 5 minutes in that line of work. Still, as cid said, you harden up after a while. You have to.

 

[exosculate]

I would have filmed/photographed if I had been there - seems perefectly reasonable to do so and distribute it so others can connect to it.

I so disagree with the opening post.

 

[Cid]

I would have filmed/photographed if I had been there - seems perefectly reasonable to do so and distribute it so others can connect to it.

I so disagree with the opening post.

Did a St John's ambulance course a little while ago, so I probably would've helped where I could. After that I would certainly have taken photos though.

 

[newbie]

I have mixed feelings on this issue but most of my points have been covered.

However I was disappointed by one piece of footage that the BBC (and possibly others) showed of a guy on a stretcher having resuscitation. I really hope his family did not have to view him possibly dying on national television.

I only had half an ear on it but Material World on R4 has just been discussing this with the news editor concerned. He said he felt in retrospect that broadcasting that clip was a mistake.

You might find it on Listen Again- I think they were also discussing the phone coverage they were sent, but as I say I was only half listening because of the other stuff I was trying to do .

 

[past caring]

How can you tell it was a member of the public? The doctors would probably be in normal clothes.

Because it wasn't a still - it was "live" footage taken with a video phone. And there's a difference between the actions of someone giving medical attention and someone quite distressed comforting someone in a much worse situation - the woman who was doing the comforting was clearly distressed herself.

Of course, she may have been a doctor and the injured/dying person beyond help. Either way, to stand there and film the thing on your mobile is a reaction I really don't understand...

And yes, I do draw a distinction between reporters and photographers whose job it is to report on such events.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

It is important though to stress (obviously) that taking photos are not acceptable when they're actually hindering rescue efforts, i.e. in Badger Kitten's description of the guy actually blocking the way of the survivors coming out of Russel Square.

Then again, I find it difficult to believe that he actually realised what he was doing. People aren't always good at realising the possible consequences of their actions when so much drama and hecticness is going on. Didn't stop him getting in the way though.

 

[exosculate]

Did a St John's ambulance course a little while ago, so I probably would've helped where I could. After that I would certainly have taken photos though.

I would have helped too, but If I couldn't be of use (which is likely) I would have photographed.

 

[dylanredefined]

if I stumbled out of a bombing and someone was filming me .I wouldnt be very happy wether they were professional or amateaur and if they were in the way they would get a smack imho . if i found someone had made money out of my misery i would demand a cut or cut them .

 

[Agent Sparrow]

if I stumbled out of a bombing and someone was filming me .I wouldnt be very happy wether they were professional or amateaur

I can completely see why that would be upsetting for you. However, all those who are saying how terrible these sorts of images are - did you turn away from the news when images of the tsunami were on? Or Sept 11th? Or of the atrocities in Iraq?

Those pictures always have to come from somewhere. Its always some individual, with real pain and a real life who has to be filmed.

It has actually started more of a debate going in my head about the use of such images though.

 

[laptop]

It has actually started more of a debate going in my head about the use of such images though.

The papers have been pushing the boundaries, compared to previous UK practice, haven't they?

As for the people with the cameraphones not helping - I'm thinking back to the one time I came across someone knocked off their moped, just as a "helpful" person was about to sit the wounded person up... had to take charge and send them off to a distant phone box to get them out of the way before they risked leaving someone paralysed. Stopping such misguided help is one of the major taks in first aid, isn't it?

So in a sense mobiles may have replaced phoneboxes in more ways than one.

 

[Louloubelle]

If I got caught up in a terrible situation like a tsunami or terrorist attack, I would do my best to help people but if there was nothing more I could do I would definitely take photographs or film what was going on with my video phone.

Apart from the logical reasons of collecting evidence I think that one of the motivations for this is to alleviate the crushing loneliness that can accompany an experience of trauma like this.

A picture can convey a thousand words and people often need to communicate about what they've seen but don't know how to begin talking about it.

 

[Badger Kitten]

When I got out at Russell Square there was a man filming with a videophone. I shouted at him. He was filming us staggering out. He was in the fucking way as we were trying to get out. I felt like punching him.

I take it back about being angry at the filmers; the police told me yesterday that it really helped them when people filmed disasters. So I described the man filming survivors exiting Russell Square to the police. They are looking now for him, it could help the enquiry if the find him, the bomber may have got off the train post-blast at Russell Square and may have been filmed, it will also help those searching for and identifying the missing.

 

[madzone]

There was a woman interviewed on Phil n Fern who shot some videophone footage in the underground. She said she did it to show her husband because it all felt so unreal that by the time she got home she would have felt as if she was making it up. It's concievably the same reaction from those above ground surely?

 

[Louloubelle]

There was a woman interviewed on Phil n Fern who shot some videophone footage in the underground. She said she did it to show her husband because it all felt so unreal that by the time she got home she would have felt as if she was making it up. It's concievably the same reaction from those above ground surely?

I can relate to that

I think another reason would be not knowing if you were going to make it alive and somehow wanting your last experiences to be recorded and known.

 

[Sunspots]

Life lived second-hand...

I think some people's instinctive urge to record events is symptomatic of something deeper.

Seeing recorded footage on TV is something we've all grown up with, and it's how most of us are accustomed to 'experiencing' news events nowadays. To live it second-hand, from a distance.

It reminds me of the many occasions when I've been visiting places like cathedrals or ancient ruins or whatever, admiring the incredible artistry on the ceilings, then looking at several other people who never actually look at what's in front of them except through the viewfinder. They just instinctively capture it on video.

Or the way people will pay loads of money to see a band play at a stadium, then seem to be content to watch it on one of the big screens placed throughout the venue, rather than look at what's actually happening there, now, live.

Maybe it's a result of the acceleration of everyday life, and technology allowing people to never really have to experience 'the moment' as it happens, but to instinctively record it with the intention of watching it later.

With some people nowadays, if they haven't got recorded proof of something, it never really happened.

In this case, where somebody's first thought was to film the terrifying events going on, maybe watching it through a camera's viewfinder was a way of distancing themselves from the horrible reality of what was happening at that moment.

I dunno, just my thoughts. It's all just rather 'spectacular'...

 

[editor]

Maybe the person didn't want to be filmed. Would they have any rights over their image? Was their permission asked? How would their family feel?

Maybe the person was happy to be filmed? Maybe they were happy to have such an important event documented? Maybe their family were happy and comforted to see the footage of their loved one?

If I was caught up it such a situation I would do my best to help people first - and take snaps when I could - because such footage may prove vital clues and help explain the story of the dreadful events.

 

[girasol]

That's right - we shouldn't judge anybody.

Where exactly did I say that? Do NOT take my words out of context and quote me as saying something I didn't!

I've been too ill to post properly in the last couple of days, but enough people have echoed my feelings about filming/photographing the events better than I would have done.

However I do completely understand how some people wouldn't have liked to have been recorded under such circumstances and I wonder what their rights would be should their picture be on the front page without their prior knowledge? Does anybody know?